Junk Food Marketing through Movies

In today's LA Times, Patrick Goldstein writes about how Hollywood executives can't pass up the millions they make by marketing junk food to kids through movie tie-ins. Goldstein quotes Universal Chairman Marc Schmuger making the "freedom of choice" argument. He states

We're not forcing anyone to eat fast food. We're encouraging people to have freedom of choice. It's up to the individual or the family to decide where they want to eat. It is easy for corporations to lay all of the responsibility on parents, but what they don't acknowledge is that each year companies spend $15 BILLION on marketing directly to children. Companies market to kids in every aspect of their lives, billboards on the way to school, in school, on television. Even PBS, which used to be a bastion of commercial free space is now almost indistinguishable from their corporate comrades.

In her book Consuming Kids, Susan Linn asks which battle are parents supposed to choose? The junk food, violent video games, TV, precocious sexuality?

In her article, Disney's PR Strategy Unhealthy for 'Little Consumers Michele Simon brilliantly explains why Disney and the rest of the media industry cannot police themselves when it comes to marketing junk food to kids. She writes

Disney's announcement amounts to little more than an excuse to keep its brand in front of kids. By setting nutrition guidelines -- as opposed to stopping the promotionof cartoon-branded food altogether, as many child advocates are calling for -- Disney has cleverly given itself an entirely new marketing opportunity. According to the company 's press release, "Disney Consumer Products has already begun to offer many licensed products which comply with the guidelines. They include breakfast items such as instant oatmeal featuring characters like The Incredibles and Kim Possible, and Disney Garden fresh produce such as kid-sized apples and bananas." I've never heard of "kid-sized" fruit.

While Disney is telling us its motivation is children's health, the company's true goal is to get parents to keep buying its products and visiting its theme parks, and most importantly, to keep the Disney brand in front of kids' eyes. So now cartoon characters will market allegedly healthier foods to kids. But children don't need the Incredibles to tell them when and what to eat. Kids, like adults, get hungry all by themselves. That's how nature designed us. If companies like Disney would simply get out of the way, parents would have a much easier job.

Last year's Narnia is another example of the way a film can become an advertising juggernaut. In his article The Commercialization of Narnia in Mothering Magazine Josh Golin describes how Narnia, a "family friendly" movies was launched with $150 million of corporate tie-ins including Narnia Happy Meals at McDonald's. A book that for many kids was a private enchanted land was turned into a marketing extravaganza.

I am thrilled that someone in LA is writing about these issues, but here in the belly of the beast, the studios seem reluctant at best to reflect on the ethics of their marketing strategies that involve children. Goldstein focuses on the obesity aspect, and wonders if Shrek shouldn't be selling his soul for a happy meal. What Goldstein, new to this issue, doesn't realize, is that Hollywood isn't just trying to sell junk food to kids. Movies marketed to kids often also come with a large serving of violence, gender stereotypes, and excessive consumerism as well.